Brownlow votes leaked

[Dean]

Robert Harvey 26
James Hird 24
Michael Voss 24
Nathan Buckley 22
Mark Ricciuto 21
Nick Stevens 19
Gavin Wanganeen 19
Adam Goodes 19
Brent Harvey 18
Shane Crawford 18

Published in todays Daily Telegraph

[hammo]

Can't be right because Goodsey didn't win and where's Kirky??

[Charlie]

Bwa ha ha... Bigfooty beats them again!!!

http://www.bigfooty.com/forum/showth...threadid=82812

That doesn't mean I believe them though. Too many players on high numbers of votes. Generally, about 22 votes wins, and they have 10 on 18 or more, as was mentioned in that Bigfooty thread.

[Charlie]

LOL - Obviously the Daily Tele didn't bother to read the whole thread... flipping through the last couple of pages, what did I find but...

Originally posted by bozza
Just kidding
Thought I'd see how many would actually believe such utter garbage!
Clearly a few did

And as if a secretary would know anyway

TOO FUNNY!!!

He made the God damn thing up!

[Dean]

Thats rather funny actually, wish I had seen that thread before I posted here, but imagine what people who dont find out eventually are going to think

[Charlie]

What makes it even funnier is this article in the Herald-Sun...

Brownlow 'leak' sparks plunge on Harvey
By GEOFF POULTER
13sep03

PUNTERS yesterday rushed to back St Kilda veteran Robert Harvey to win his third Brownlow Medal.

The season's first big Brownlow leak saw thousands of dollars plunged on the Saint, who has enjoyed his best season since winning back-to-back medals in 1997-98.
At the height of the betting frenzy, Harvey was backed from $13 to $5.50 in some markets. Last night $8 was again freely available.

A widely circulated e-mail claimed to reveal the medal result.

The bookies appeared unconcerned, sharpened their pencils and wondered aloud why people tumbled in every year to leaks.

Melbourne TAB Sportsbet's Gary Davies said there had been a lot of small bets placed on Harvey yesterday.

"About a third of the money today was for Harvey," he said.

"It's happened before. An e-mail had all the votes in it last year but it was not right. But we do treat it with care."

Centrebet's Fabian Cananzi was not too bothered about the leak.

"It happened last year when they said Buckley would win," he said. "We took twice as much today on Harvey as we have for the whole year."

Sportsbet's Brad Taylor said Brownlow leaks such as yesterday's happened every year.

"We have taken a lot of bets on him," he said.

Melbourne bookmaker Norm Short said he had laid Harvey before the season.

"He's no good to me. I laid him then at 80-1 for $200."

Short said there could be no leak as the votes weren't opened until the count night, and that only the umpires would know who they voted for.

In Sydney, SportsTAB temporarily suspended betting yesterday at 10.20am after they received information that Harvey would win his third Brownlow.

SportsTAB reopened betting later in the day after AFL officials cast doubts on the information and the TAB's own investigations failed to substantiate the rumours.

But within minutes of reopening, SportsTAB was rushed by punters wanting to back Harvey, including one man who outlaid $3200 at 10-1, a return of $32,000 if the rumour is correct.


http://www.heraldsun.news.com.au/com...E20322,00.html

When people begin to realise that this was a hoax, there will be some unhappy punters out there...

[SXP]

Oh, the famous "leaking" again!
Who's benefiting from this? The bookies?

[ugg]

Shows the quality of the Daily Terror's journalism. At least they could have published the 'source' of the leak.

[Nico]

Clearly a bookies leak. They do it every year, and the media falls for it every time.

My brother in law was a reserves umpire in the early 80,s and he said that umpires did talk between themselves to a point, but it was impossible to work out all the votes without them all getting together every week to discuss who gave who votes.

The security and process has changed since then, so it is hardly likely that a leak will occur.